Same-sex marriage

This seems to be quite a controversial subject currently. Abortion is probably a bit bigger of an issue, but I think that argument's also been going on longer, so I'm not as interested in it right now.

It's funny how strongly people can feel about the issue of same-sex marriage, even if they are not themselves homosexual. Especially conservatives. Personally, I think that most conservatives are against same-sex marriage for all the wrong reasons. Most of these conservatives are religious, and they want their belief and moral system to be forced on everyone else. Allow me to summarize the perspective of a typical conservative that is against same-sex marriage:

Marriage is defined in the Bible as the union between a man and a woman. Therefore, two men or two women can't get married. Marriage is a Christian ceremony, so why should non-believing gays be allowed to take part in it?

The huge problem with this perspective is that these conservatives are trying to suppress the rights of a minority just because of semantics. Just because they have a prefabricated guess at the real definition of marriage, they would deny homosexuals the governmental and financial benefits of the union. The fact is that marriage did not originate with Christianity. I agree that homosexuals should not be getting traditional Christian ceremonies in real churches, but that's not what defines marriage. Marriage existed in many secular cultures all over the world, even before Christianity was made prevalent. To the ancient Greeks, same-sex marriages were perfectly acceptable and valid. Who really is the authority on whether the definition includes only male-female relationships? How far back does the root word go? Latin maritare, meaning "to give a husband to", certainly doesn't exclude homosexual relationships. Therefore, I completely disagree with anyone who is against same-sex marriage just because marriage is supposed to be between a man and a woman.

Also, there is quite a bit of debate about whether homosexuality is genetic or a learned behavior. It really doesn't matter, though, what the cause is. Homosexuals have never been and never will be able to reproduce without adoption or artificial insemination; and there have always been and always be homosexuals, regardless of official recognition as a married couple. The human population is not declining, even in countries where same-sex marriage is legal and accepted.

If you don't know me, I guess you'd suppose I'm a strong proponent of same-sex marriage at this point. I'll be easy on you and let you know this time that I love to play the devil's advocate. In reality, I am simply uncertain whether gay marriage is right or wrong. To me, the real issue is whether or not children raised with a male father and female mother grow up happier, in better emotional and spiritual condition. It has nothing to do with religion. It has nothing to do with the couple themselves. I've heard people say that children without a mother and father are less happy, more likely to be abused, and/or less likely to find a job after school, but I've also seen studies that say that children raised by homosexual parents turn out just as healthy as children raised by traditional parents.

Allowing gay marriage increases the chance that a child will be adopted by gay parents or created through artificial insemination, depriving them of a chance to be adopted by a heterosexual couple. If statistically, the child would be better of with the heterosexual couple, I would be against gay marriage. However, I see no problem with a homosexual person having the right to visit his or her significant other in a hospital. The fact is that none of the studies are conclusive, so I'm neither for nor against it. There simply needs to be more study done on this subject. Without this, I cannot take an informed stance on same-sex marriage. I guess you can call me utilitarian on this issue.